HILARY CLINTON: POLITICS AND PROZAC

     The 2016 US Elections are difficult subject to comment upon. Elections here are mostly media spectacles these days. The Reagan Administration was really the last one where ideology actually was a factor. Since 1989, our government, and our culture generally, has been under the thumb of organized crime, Left-Wing fanatics, religious cultists, and career bureaucrats.

       So it is really unsurprising that Hilary Rodham-Clinton, presidential candidate and political gangster, would escape indictment for multitudinous crimes related to the equally illegal takeover of Libya. Those of us who remember the 1990s recall that these kinds of incidents happened with such frequency during the Clinton Administration that it was difficult even to remember them all. The Benghazi E-mail Scandal does sound suspiciously similar to the 1990s scandal involving Clinton's sale of military secrets to China.

        Julian Assange of Wikileaks---himself a target of a Clinton criminal vendetta---released 1,258 e-mails related to the investigation this weekend. Assange stated that there was sufficient evidence to indict Clinton, but predicted that she would not be.

         Assange, it should be noted, has outstanding warrants in the US for releasing classified materials. Not unlike Edward Snowden, now a refugee living in Russia, who is wanted in the US for the same thing. Unlike Clinton, however, Assange and Snowden were exposing the criminal activities of the US government.

          John Kiriakou, a former CIA operative who was imprisoned for nearly 3 years after exposing the US government's complicity in torture, spoke out against the nonexistent American legal standards of today.

         "If you are a whistleblower, you can expect the entire weight of the US government to fall upon your head. But if you are a well-connected political figure you can violate the country's espionage laws and know that you'll get away with it."

          This is also largely because the criminals in our government can also rely on an effete and degenerate population that is far more concerned with some Hollywood stooge's remarks at an awards ceremony than with revelations of illegal acts committed by our so-called leaders. A petition to keep some foul-mouthed bum as a cast member on some TV series has several thousand signatures; no petitions to pardon Edward Snowden so far.

           Whether or not this miscarriage of justice will effect Clinton's election chances is an immaterial question. Does anybody seriously believe that a government that imprisons whistleblowers and exonerates criminal political activities is going to give us a fair and impartial election? Or, as the experts are already arguing---not being indicted by a federal grand jury is somehow proof of an excellent moral character?

              Justice has been a dead letter in the United States for nearly 30 years. The average Ameroboob wants it this way, whether he'll admit it or not. Indicting Hilary Rodham-Clinton would set a bad precedent. Other crimes might start being investigated if that had happened. There's considerably more profit in injustice.

              So more than likely, Americans will continue, spoon-fed by the Government-Media Complex: